金融重建基金制度建構與執行績效：台灣與南韓的比較分析

一九九七年亞洲發生金融風暴，台灣與南韓受創程度不同，六年來兩國政府都積極進行金融改革，然而因政治經濟結構不同，使得兩國金融改革成效各異。本研究從比較的觀點，探討台灣與南韓金融重建制度特徵與效能之異同，南韓金融改革成功的原因主要有三：1.國際壓力與協助；2.南韓政府處理金融危機，有其配套與程序完整性，因此能取信於社會與朝野政黨；3.南韓金融改革極為透明，較受到在野黨與社會大眾支持。台灣金融重建基金設立所遭遇的困難遠比南韓還大，其主要原因有二，一是朝野政策認知分歧，其次是朝野政策工具選擇不同。事實上，台灣金融重建政策陷入行政機關與立法機關，以及執政黨與在野黨間的立場對立與政策無共識，導致台灣的金融重建績效遠不如南韓。從政府體制而言，台灣面臨「分立政府」與「分立政策」的不利因素，朝野間金融改革的政策共識不易建立，或許台灣未曾發生金融風暴，因此朝野與社會未有如同南韓那種「解除魔障」的改革決心，導致改革所需的政治魄力無法營造，終影響改革績效。

關鍵字

金融重建基金；資產管理公司；不良資產；政策共識；分立政府

並列摘要

Taiwan and South Korea both suffered from the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the governments of these two countries have been diligenty working on financial reforms over the past six years. Reform performances have varied due to differences in political economic structures and external contexts. This paper examines the different patterns and effectiveness of institutional choice for financial reconstruction through a comparative perspective. The relatively successful financial reforms of South Korea consist of three factors: (1) external pressure and aid, (2) comprehensive government reform programs, (3) transparency of reform programs and full support from society. On the contrary, Taiwanese financial reforms have encountered more difficulties. The key factors include: (1) differences of policy cognition in partisan politics, (2) differences of policy alternatives between ruling and oppositional parties. As an example, the institutional choice of Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) has problems due to severe partisan politics. As a result, the scale, operation, and management of RTC lacks a consensus on policy. In terms of the partisan system, Taiwan faces a divided government and consequently, a divided policy that obstructs planning and implementation of RTC.